Comments on: Creativity http://serenae.com/2007/06/28/creativity-2/ Freelance Creativity Sun, 06 May 2012 23:43:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: gcampbel http://serenae.com/2007/06/28/creativity-2/comment-page-1/#comment-194 gcampbel Fri, 06 Jul 2007 13:00:52 +0000 http://serena.umwblogs.org/2007/06/28/creativity/#comment-194 Joe, All concerns understood and appreciated. And as a student of Milton, I fully believe that creativity is not spurred only by problems, but also by abundance and goodness. That said, if "problem" is interpreted in a creative way (I don't think you were there the night we did an extended riff on 'problem' via the OED), then it becomes something truly inspiring and wonderful, almost a serious game (serio ludere), an earnest playfulness. Of course there is one big problem that must be acknowledged in our current state, the elephant in the room really: what does it mean to live in a world in which we must die? And what does "time" mean? And what is love, and how do we know it, and how can we share it? I guess I'm throwing many things forward here.... :) Joe,

All concerns understood and appreciated. And as a student of Milton, I fully believe that creativity is not spurred only by problems, but also by abundance and goodness. That said, if “problem” is interpreted in a creative way (I don’t think you were there the night we did an extended riff on ‘problem’ via the OED), then it becomes something truly inspiring and wonderful, almost a serious game (serio ludere), an earnest playfulness.

Of course there is one big problem that must be acknowledged in our current state, the elephant in the room really: what does it mean to live in a world in which we must die?

And what does “time” mean?

And what is love, and how do we know it, and how can we share it?

I guess I’m throwing many things forward here…. :)

]]> By: Serena http://serenae.com/2007/06/28/creativity-2/comment-page-1/#comment-193 Serena Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:17:34 +0000 http://serena.umwblogs.org/2007/06/28/creativity/#comment-193 **Note to self: Is every piece of artwork a portrait of the world? (world defined in this case as non-physical, timeless) **Note to self: Is every piece of artwork a portrait of the world?
(world defined in this case as non-physical, timeless)

]]> By: Steve http://serenae.com/2007/06/28/creativity-2/comment-page-1/#comment-192 Steve Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:36:33 +0000 http://serena.umwblogs.org/2007/06/28/creativity/#comment-192 As Isaac Newton said, "We stand on the shoulders of Giants." As Isaac Newton said, “We stand on the shoulders of Giants.”

]]> By: Joseph McMahon http://serenae.com/2007/06/28/creativity-2/comment-page-1/#comment-191 Joseph McMahon Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:26:26 +0000 http://serena.umwblogs.org/2007/06/28/creativity/#comment-191 Since I first saw the original statement which started all of this discussion, I was quite wary of it, and honestly I think it's a fairly dangerous assumption to make. "Problem," like "creativity," is a largely self-interpreted word. What might not at all be a problem for me might be a big problem for someone else. I don't like Cheerios. Is this a problem? No, because I won't buy them, but now it's a problem for General Mills, because they have to make another kind of breakfast cereal to appease the tastebud gods. I have, in effect, forced General Mills to be creative, to manufacture Count Chocula. But here's the problem(har, har): if everyone were forced into creativity because they are facing a problem, would the arts be doomed? Therein lies the danger of such a constricting (use of the word "all") generalization. General Mills has made Count Chocula, a decision which has profoundly impacted my morning meal (sugar intake). If I drew a picture of flowers and gave it to someone I cared about, because I felt like they should be having a good day, is this not profound? It's quite possible, I think, to make something beautiful for the sake of making it beautiful, or to be creative for the sake of creativity. Rather, the ability to reveal emotion, affect others, reveal one's self and inspire thought are not necessarily dependent on a pre-existing circumstance, or problem. Is art always a response to a problem? Is there such a thing as creativity for the sake thereof? Am I just totally not getting it? I should've been an English major. Since I first saw the original statement which started all of this discussion, I was quite wary of it, and honestly I think it’s a fairly dangerous assumption to make.

“Problem,” like “creativity,” is a largely self-interpreted word. What might not at all be a problem for me might be a big problem for someone else. I don’t like Cheerios. Is this a problem? No, because I won’t buy them, but now it’s a problem for General Mills, because they have to make another kind of breakfast cereal to appease the tastebud gods. I have, in effect, forced General Mills to be creative, to manufacture Count Chocula.

But here’s the problem(har, har): if everyone were forced into creativity because they are facing a problem, would the arts be doomed? Therein lies the danger of such a constricting (use of the word “all”) generalization. General Mills has made Count Chocula, a decision which has profoundly impacted my morning meal (sugar intake). If I drew a picture of flowers and gave it to someone I cared about, because I felt like they should be having a good day, is this not profound?

It’s quite possible, I think, to make something beautiful for the sake of making it beautiful, or to be creative for the sake of creativity. Rather, the ability to reveal emotion, affect others, reveal one’s self and inspire thought are not necessarily dependent on a pre-existing circumstance, or problem.

Is art always a response to a problem?

Is there such a thing as creativity for the sake thereof?

Am I just totally not getting it? I should’ve been an English major.

]]>